I reverted my change to how it was before until I am able to survey plus ask the city about detailed opening hours and fee hours.

That’s understandble. Should I should guess and put the bike rack or bench as close to the bus stop as possible if I’m not surveying the location myself? I also see bench:yes/no as an acceptable tag for bus stops on the highway:bus_stop page. I’m just getting the info about whether there is a bike rack or bench from cata.org. Should even benches within shelters be mapped separately, in your opinion?

Sounds good, thank you. I'm not going to fix it right away, but I will once I add them to the route relation. Those stops are only part of a single route so hopefully it shouldn't cause any issues before I fix it

added *the* older one to the bus route [CATA route 1].

Oops, I guess I forgot to check if I had all my ways downloaded there, I didn't see that there was already a link. I removed it and added to older one to the bus route.

West end*, near CTC

Also adds missing roads to east end of route 1

I posted a discussion about the topic on the Michigan discussion page

osm.wiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Michigan&oldid=2783251#Tagging_key:foot_for_roads

meant to add source=local_knowledge;aerial_imagery here

I'll come back to this when I have more time, but for now:
> It is my understanding, by default in Michigan, as long as they are moving, people are allowed to walk on any roadway not designated as a freeway.

MCL 257.655 states " Where sidewalks are provided, a pedestrian shall not walk upon the main traveled portion of the highway. Where sidewalks are not provided, pedestrians shall, when practicable, walk on the left side of the highway facing traffic which passes nearest." with highway meaning any roadway

> I'm not sure those are meant to be tagged, a pool is inherently unroutable since it's a body of water, and I don't know of a standardized tagging for "suggested paths through water".

I might have been unclear, I'm not trying to suggest paths through the water, but rather, that is the direction of active water flow/current (as a result of the water slides), although those are also the paths exiting the water slide current (either out of the pool area or into the lazy river, which I marked according to current flow).

> No, the wiki should only be changed if there's a large usage of the tag

I wasn't meaning that the wiki should be changed, rather asking if I should change the tag on the object. Anyway, I did change the tag, from highway=lazy_river to leisure=lazy_river

Why shouldn't the contact page of the website be listed separately from the general website? After all, there is a separate tag for contact:website and website.

Also I'll probably copy the tags from the node into the building because the Bike Co-op occupies the entire space so there is really only one entity there.

I added the two separate Facebooks on here because the Facebook group contains information on meeting times that is not present on either their website (oops, I meant to add that before) or their Facebook profile, namely, the Alley Cat rides (e.g. https://www.facebook.com/events/418680934369640).

I will move the mention of Alley Cat rides from opening_hours to service_times, as that is more appropriate for an event with a single beginning time.

Is there a way I should indicate via tags the purposes for each of the separate Facebook pages? facebook:group, contact:facebook:group, or source:service_times perhaps? I choose to specifically use the profile for contact:facebook as that is where the operator communicates directly and where they accept messages, and I choose the group for facebook= because it seemed the only appropriate available key.

Hi, is it bad to add redundant tags? Although they may be redundant to people editing in Michigan, is it not better to be explicit so the router will know it is legal to bike on sidewalks?
I can start adding smoothness and ensuring width is present as well to improve routing (as sidewalks usually have inferior smoothness to roads, but not always, as streets can sometimes have more debris present than sidewalks [side note: is there a way to tag the smoothness of a bike lane separate from the road, for example when the road is smooth but the bike lane accumulates debris from the road?]).

I was trying to primarily focus on adding bicycle=yes on sidewalks adjacent to one-way and especially busy/fast roads like Saginaw and Oakland to fix routing where an unnecessary (and oftentimes dangerous, as it usually means riding with traffic on a de facto 45 mph road) detour would be suggested simply to avoid using the sidewalk.

I can understand the concerns about the dangers of high speed biking on sidewalks, but I would think that should be something that the router should account for when seeing the width and the combination foot/bicycle=yes. Although I think sidewalks should ideally have separate bike areas added whenever possible to make traffic safer for all road users, but obviously that's not an OSM issue.

As for bicycle=yes on roads, should it just be left up to the router whether that road can be biked? Should I only add a bicycle tag when it is bicycle=no, such as on segregated freeways?

I've also been tagging roads explicitly with their foot tag, whether yes or no, because that depends on factors not related to tags on the roadway itself, but instead to whether there is an adjacent sidewalk or not. Is that okay? Should I just leave the tag blank on roads with sidewalks and only explicitly add foot=yes on roads without sidewalks?

I've also wondered about places where access is legal but hardly practical, such as on roads where there is no gutter area separate from traffic lanes (see the North Larch St Bridge from Lake Lansing Road to East Cesar E. Chavez Avenue and vice versa [I do now see that you marked this as cycleway:right=no. Is this sufficient to tell a router that this is not a good way to route?]).

Thank you,
Aenet

I am going to tag the bodyboarding pool ("FlowRider") as leisure=playground and sport=surfing for now to indicate that it is a facility primarily for children to bodyboard/surf

I'll change the highway from "water_path" to "path" for now, those ways were meant to indicate traffic flows within a pool area, both after exiting a water slide and for approaching stairs. Is there a tag that I can use to indicate that the path is used for these purposes, or simply to indicate that they are paths within the water? I could add swimming=yes to these, as I had with the lazy river (which this tag is also not listed on the wiki for highway, should I change it?), although I don't know if I should be using key:swimming in the same way as key:foot.
Also, I am going to mark most of the waterpark features as indoor=yes to fix them being rendered when only trying to render normal outdoor features (except for the slides, because they run outside the building, unless you think it would be better to mark these indoor=yes also, since they are only accessible from the inside. I also wanted to add a level tag and stairs, to better indicate the levels you must ascend to reach the top of the slide, although I don't know what level the water slides would be marked as, since they go from the top [about the 2nd or 3rd level or level=1 or 2] all the way to the bottom).
As for the untagged way, it is a bodyboarding machine which has water flow up a slope so that people can bodyboard on it. To the best of my knowledge it has no other purpose, and it is not deep enough to swim in anyway, so marking it as a swimming pool seems incorrect. I don't see tags for bodyboarding on the wiki, so maybe the surfing tag could be used there.

Thank you for fixing this, sorry about that, I think I was manually typing the tags in and forgot the proper tagging for sidewalk. I'm going to try to use the presets in JOSM when I'm editing going forward.

Just trying to get a feel for indoor mapping. I'll probably come back to this later and get images of the emergency maps of the other floors so I can add them too.

Why remove foot=yes?